In recent times, there has been a development quite odd and unprecedented in the annals of the sexual revolution. When Americas traditional sexual mores started to break down, it always took the form of slouching toward tolerance. For example, consider fornication. Two unmarried opposite-sex individuals cohabitating was once known as living in sin and was not something any couple could do in their community. But as pedophile Alfred Kinseys fraudulent science and the phenomenon whereby, as Confucius said, no one likes virtue as much as sex eroded moral barriers, this started to change. And then one thing led to another, people did their thing, and, over time, tolerance resulted as a matter of course (Im not implying this is a good thing).

Now, notable here  notable only because of the aforementioned development  is that fornicators never called for government benefits; they never beat the drum for civil unions. They never started lobbying groups. And the worst those objecting to their practices were called was prudes or Puritans; no one ever thought to brand them bigots or make Forniphobe a repeated-to-staleness neologism. And, of course, anyone who hasnt been asleep for the last 20 years knows exactly what Im analogizing here.

This brings me to an article in The Week by Damon Linker. He writes that while he supports faux marriage, he is also

[snip]...Linkers surprise indicates that he doesnt know his fellow leftists very well. He also then, by complaining that he isnt happy with the sloppy way the most strident gay-marriage proponents have been throwing around the term bigotry, reveals his status: nice useful idiot. There are only two other categories of leftists, by the way, and they constitute the majority of the passionate. One would be the users.

Importantly, the context for Kinsey was that much of the Bible Belt was dominated by sectarian cliques, who used their social status to force unnatural behavior under a veneer of morality. A lot of people chafed under this abusive direction. Nobody likes to be told who they will marry, and who they must bow and scrape before to achieve social acceptability.

And much of the morality of the time was hypocritical. Finally, several events, including scandals, precipitated its downfall.

There was a very good reason Kinsey was invited to Indiana University, and why his albeit fraudulent research had such a shattering effect on the status quo. One which a very large number of people appreciated.

But, in the final analysis, it was a reaction to *corrupt* Christianity, that once set in motion turned against the morality of *all* Christianity.

And the way that Christianity can overcome this is by promoting wise and proper morality, whose purpose accomplishes biological ends for the best result for moral people, as a man and a woman, and their children.

This morality begins with young children, to insure that they have an understanding of the opposite gender and behave in a polite manner. They must have extensive (chaperoned) non-sexual interaction long before their sexuality is an issue.

Then, as they are older, they need to be comfortable with any number of social interactions, so that girls generally know how boys behave, and boys generally know how girls behave. And how to interact with each other while keeping their mating impulses and hormones in check.

Importantly, the context for Kinsey was that much of the Bible Belt was dominated by sectarian cliques, who used their social status to force unnatural behavior under a veneer of morality. A lot of people chafed under this abusive direction. Nobody likes to be told who they will marry, and who they must bow and scrape before to achieve social acceptability.

What are you talking about?

6
posted on 03/15/2014 2:13:03 PM PDT
by ansel12
((Libertarianism offers the transitory concepts and dialogue to move from conservatism, to liberalism)

Traditionally morality is not just religious based. It is very practícal. The breakdown in morality was helped along by modern medicine when it learned to treatement STDs with antibiotics. However, new strains are mutating that are resistant. We will soon be forced to return to traditional morality because the antibiotic bubble is over.

However I dont think the bubble is over since the next revolution of medical nanobots and genetic engineering will wipe out any disease.

There isn't much time, drug resistant STDs are already here, and they will only increase. Yet sex education classes and popular culture ignore this fact. Since untreated STDs can result in sterility, it will become one of the several reasons for a demographic collapse. A cure may be found, but during a demographic collapse, the economy will collapse as well, and there is no reason to suspect that medical science will get the funding they need to continue the party. Returning to traditional morality, however, is free.

There isn't much time, drug resistant STDs are already here, and they will only increase. Yet sex education classes and popular culture ignore this fact.

I think movie producer/director Judd Apatow was the only one brave enough to say "herpes is forever" in two of his films, "Forgetting Sarah Marshall" and "Get Him to the Greek." He was also brave enough, in "Knocked Up" to point out that sex leads to -- surprise! -- pregnancy, and the birth of a child. Imagine that.

Anyhow, he's the only example that comes to mind. Pathetic, isn't it? Everyone else portrays sex as this sterile, consequence-free recreational activity, and young audiences eat it up.

Nearly everyone correctly points to the work of Kinsey as being an accelerant in the “sexual revolution”, but few point out the contributions of Democrat activist Margaret Mead. Her works, like Kinsey’s, were based on falsehoods and misinformation; and, like his, were accepted as gospel by an intelligentsia which sought absolution for their conduct. From them her relativism spread throughout the culture.

I always have to ask, what caused this, “When Americas traditional sexual mores started to break down”. The only conclusion that I can come to is it has to do with the father. Somehow, the father stopped caring and/or taking the responsibility for the training up of their children, so that their daughters thought it would be acceptable to “live in sin.” I am still amiss as to what happened to the fathers.

Somehow, the father stopped caring and/or taking the responsibility for the training up of their children, so that their daughters thought it would be acceptable to live in sin. I am still amiss as to what happened to the fathers.

Maybe it was because the generation of fathers who had lived in sin themselves thought it was hypocritical for them to teach sexual propriety to their children. As a result their children received no moral teaching at all.

The only conclusion that I can come to is it has to do with the father. Somehow, the father stopped caring and/or taking the responsibility for the training up of their children, so that their daughters thought it would be acceptable to live in sin. I am still amiss as to what happened to the fathers.

How does that work when this society has granted significantly more political and social horsepower to women?

Talk about blaming the victim....

17
posted on 03/16/2014 1:20:04 AM PDT
by papertyger
(if disdain of homosexual behavior is "bigotry," is it any wonder hostility to Islam is "racism?")

In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful. ― C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man

18
posted on 03/16/2014 1:24:14 AM PDT
by papertyger
(if disdain of homosexual behavior is "bigotry," is it any wonder hostility to Islam is "racism?")

Yes, I also go back to WWII and attempt to see if something at that time didn’t start the disintegration of fatherhood and/or some type of absent fatherhood figure. I don’t know, but something happened.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.